Posted on 08/21/2018 12:01:39 PM PDT by Norski
You mean it's not logi_cal?
There is a a condition that I call the Timothy Treadwell Syndrome were loss all objectivity about an animal and become almost Disney like in their believe that an animal can be dangerous or would want to hurt them. This Grandmother clear exhibited multiple signs that this was a very dangerous animal and yet choose to ignore those signs why? Because she was on a wonder champagne of ‘saving’ the animal! The animals life was more important to her than her grandchildren lives, hell she herself could have easily died crushed in the pit terrible maul. Many of what we often call apologies are the same way yes they might have the kindness most gentlest of these dogs as their pet, but they clearly live in a dream world were in they believe all such dogs are just as kind hearted as theirs , while complete ignoring the history of what these dogs were bred for. The news is full of such people the couple that were kill the other day by Muslims traveling around the world on their bikes because there are no evil people! I betting many of those who are proud owners of these dogs would have a fit if a Muslim moved in to their neighborhood, but are completely blind as to why someone wouldn’t want pit pulls living in their neighborhood. There are plenty of examples of the Timothy Treadwell Syndrome Siegfried & Roy are famous examples they use to take their tigers for walks and you see were that got them. Search the net you will find plenty of examples of people that keep lions, pumas, black and brown bears, alligators and so on and if confronted their augments would sound just like those we call ‘apologist’. What possible could go wrong?
You two just don’t get it, do you?
The gun control debate is as much about guns as the pit bull debate is about dogs.
It is as much straw man to blame guns for the violence perpetrated by people as it is to blame a breed for what only originates with the people which breed, encourage & prompt the problems which manifest.
If you eliminated the breed tomorrow, another would take its place because you fail to identify with the core of the problem:
People.
There IS a direct correlation between the gun control debate and this idiotic canine debate; you just choose to ignore it and blame a breed like the left blames guns.
There’s no debating idiocy, so have your cake, but you can’t eat it. I’ve already stated my piece here, but reading comprehension is obviously OUT THE WINDOW today.
Are you in the right thread?
You just defined the straw man fallacy.
Quite well, if I may add.
You may thank me now and ask for another...
Hold your breath please. If anything your post proved mine you live in a dream land were all revolves around you and no one else maters. Go on back to your Lion King World and live happily ever after.
Calling the kettle black, Strawtographer.
So that is the just of your augment? Calling names like a schoolchild. Very mature of you, very mature.
For your detractor to suggest that there is something wrong with your approach in that it keeps the focus narrow to the species selected is a cheap shot, IMHO. These beasts are bred to instinctively disable and kill with little if any threshold of provocation. To insist that you broaden the issue is an attempt to distract the audience from the seriousness of the warning that you have brought to public view.
Why do such commenters try to deflect the effort to bring the statistics and the imminence of danger to everyone? Must the neighbors of pit bull owners be continually on guard just as if they were living where cobras or rattlesnakes were commonly encountered and not wiped out?
Dude, should you choose to engage that spongy tissue between your ears and re-read what I posted, your own prior comments - Norski’s too - echo what I wrote here:
To: Norski
I have pointed out before in Albuquerque shelters there is on average 140-150 pit bull and pit bull mixes up for adoption and given month that’s and average of 1600 to 1800 doges a year. Now (put aside the mental harm and damaged caused by the abandonment and abuse) many of FR’s resident pitbull expert tell us that these dogs are safe when handled by trained skilled people. There are that meny people with those skills and training in the whole city for one years worth of these dogs much less the numbers being turned our year after year.
4 posted on 7/6/2018, 7:20:39 PM by Kartographer
Aside from some abject misinformation in your comment, emphasis on your last sentence, should you care to thank me and ask for another...or cherry-pick to reinforce your bias. Free will & all...
Saw your other; you argue just like a liberal woman I know, fallacy & all. Is your real name Laura?
Would you like another?
You consider calling people names using your brain? Just how delusional are you? Never mind I read your post I already know.
Yes.
Check your meds.
“...A five-year review of dog-bite injuries from the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, published in 2009 in the journal Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, found that almost 51 percent of the attacks were from pit bulls, almost 9 percent were from Rottweilers and 6 percent were from mixes of those two breeds...
In the 13-year period of 2005 through 2017, canines killed 433 Americans. Pit bulls contributed to 66% (284) of these deaths. Combined, pit bulls and rottweilers contributed to 76% of the total recorded deaths...
Seems to have quite a bit to do with the breed....”
What exactly about this post do you not understand???
Surely, you can’t be that blind???
People pull the trigger of guns to kill people...
So, you are saying that people sic pit bulls on people to kill them???
That would be the ONLY way to correlate the gun debate and the pit bull debate...
No, it isn’t. Your statement exposes your bias.
Liberals - people - want to ban certain types of firearms in the belief that violence & deaths will cease.
People - some liberal, others hypocrites - want to ban certain types of dogs in the belief that attacks, injuries & deaths will cease.
In the case of firearms, the government needs only to enforce the laws on the books and stop handing out FFLs on a wholesale basis (the margin on firearms is getting dangerously low due to oversaturation of a market which is HEAVILY regulated). People argue the individual right to own a firearm eclipses efforts to infringe upon it, including the actions of a minority of reckless, irresponsible & criminal firearms owners.
In the case of dogs, there is little-to-no regulation on puppy mills or problematic breeds, which happen to INCLUDE pit bulls. People argue that others have no rights to own a potentially dangerous breed. Rather than common sense regulations governing what is now overwhelmingly-unrestricted, irresponsible breeding, people seek to remove all rights of those (overwhelmingly responsible) owners who own such pets due to the actions of a minority of other irresponsible owners combined with animals which should never have been placed in a home or with irresponsible owners in the first place.
In the case of firearms, the absence of firearms has created dangerous conditions for citizens in areas of Britain, other weapons replacing firearms while being simultaneously removed from the lawful. Now it’s “knife violence”.
In the case of dogs, banning a breed will simply result in breeders creating another and you will be crowing about that breed in a decade, failing to have identified the problem.
People are the problem in both cases. The irony being that 2A supporters crow about “no infringement of rights” while in the case of pit bull activism infringing upon rights of lawful pet owners of animals who pose no more danger to the public than a black lab.
Addressing the people problem will have the greatest effect rather than another form of prohibition.
Yet the origin of your bias will still prompt you & others to sound like the Gabby Giffords of pit bull violence. Or will it?
“...pet owners of animals who pose no more danger to the public than a black lab...”
“...“...A five-year review of dog-bite injuries from the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, published in 2009 in the journal Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, found that almost 51 percent of the attacks were from pit bulls, almost 9 percent were from Rottweilers and 6 percent were from mixes of those two breeds...
In the 13-year period of 2005 through 2017, canines killed 433 Americans. Pit bulls contributed to 66% (284) of these deaths. Combined, pit bulls and rottweilers contributed to 76% of the total recorded deaths...”
Funny...I don’t see black lab listed here...
Really?
Are you available for-hire? You make my point very well.
As stated prior, reading comprehension in this thread is OUT THE WINDOW, rose-colored glasses & all...
Would you like another?
Are you really as stupid as you sound??? Or are you just not able to see that no one else in here agrees with anything that you have said???
If anyone has a “comprehension” problem, it is you....
Oh, I see.
You’re one of those who push the “consensus” angle?
Just like a lib?
Would you like another?
Oh, I see...
You’re one of those that think everyone wrong except you...
Just like a fool...
Would YOU like another?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.